4.

TEORI RELATIVISTIK ALAM SEMESTA

Let us suppose that there are two galaxies rapidly receding from us in opposite directions,
each traveling at three fourth the speed of light(fig 5.1).would an astronomer on galaxya
see Galaxy A see Galaxy B receding at one and one-half times speed of light? No, we know
from the well tested concepts of Realtivity that no material object can travel faster than the
speed of light.

However, the spectra of some quasars show a red shift (/) greeter than 1.0. According to
the ordinary radial-velocity formula (/=v/c) this implies that their velocity away from us
the greeter than speed of light:

If / = 2, v/c= 2, and therefore v=2c.

Relativity shows that the ordinary radical-velocity formula applies only to velocities that
are small compared to that of light. The correct formula, according to relativity is.

= 1+ v/c - 1

1- v/c

Using this formula, then paradox of the quasars is resolved.

3 = 1+ v/c (1)

1- v/c

3(1- v/c) = 1+ v/c (2)

9(1- v/c) = 1+ v/c (3)

9 9 v/c = 1+ v/c (4)

8 = 10 v/c (5)

v/c = 4/5 c (6)

The speed of these quasars is 4/5c and not 2c.

In resolving the paradoxes of the quasars and of our galaxy in thought experiment, the
concepts of Relativity are indispensible. When it was originally formulates this theory
was regarded as something mysterious an was considered understandable by only a
handful of scientist. Today, the basic ideas of Relativity have been rigously demonstrated in
the field of science but has also profoundly influenced oue way of thingking.

To begin with, throughout the universe there is nothing that is static or at rest;
everything moves at some velocity relative to something else. The earths velocity has
meaning only a relation to some other object such as the sun or another planet; the sun
moves at one velocity relative to nearby stars and at another to the galactic center.

Secondly, one of the demonstrated properties of light is that it travels 186,300 miles/second
with respect to whoever is measuring it: one frame of reference is valid as another.

Imagine two physicist, each in separate window-less airplane, smoothly flying at supersonic
speeds in diferent direction. Each is performing is experiments to determine the natural
laws of physics. According relativity theory, each physicist are the same in both planes, x
1010 centimeters/ second. Also both will determine that this velocity is a constant of nature
and is independent of the speed or direction of the airplane. Since the airplanes are
windowless and are moving smoothly, neither phycist will be able to determine how fast or
in what direction he is moving. (This assumes, of course, that neither has access to any of
the airplanes instruments.)

Now let us set up another thought experiment. Let us suppose that our two physicists are
now the bottom of two very high and narrow towers . At the top of each tower is a mirror
facing downward. Each man a flashlight which he point upward, turns on for an instant,
and then mesures the time the light takes to go up to the mirror and be reflected down
again (see Fig. 5.2) (Actualy, because light travels so very fast, such in experiment would
be imposible unless the towers were many time taller than tallest mountain.)

Imagine also that while this ismgoin on, the towers are moving away from each other at a
very high speed. Each physicist claim that his light went straight up and came straight
down and took exactly the same amount of time the round trip. Each will regard his tower
as stationary as he watches the other moving away from him.

Howeve , as is shown in Fig. 5.2, Physicist A will say that Bs light actually travelled farther
than his light and did not go straight up and down but ruther followed a zig-zag course.
Since distance equals the rate of speed multiplied by the time, if the rate(velocity of light)
remains constant and the distance increase. So must the time.)

Phisicist B, of course, will say the same about A since both believe themselves to be
standing still while the other moves. From As viewpoint, his light traveled a distance of ctA
(the velocity og light multiplied by the amount of time measured by A). At the same time,
Bs light traveled ctB (tB is the time measured by by B) But during the time tB, B is traveling
relative to A at velocity V and covering a distance VtB. Using the three sides af the right
triangle thus formed, A applies the Ptythagorean theorem:

(ctB)2= (ctA)2 + (VtB)2, (1)

c2tB2= c2tA2 + V2tB2, (2)

c2tB2 - V2tB2 = c2tA2, (3)

tB2(c2- V2) = c2tA2 (4)

tB = tA2 (5)

1- V2/ c2

In other words, A will conclude the Bs clocks ran slower than his. He will say that Bs light
took a longer path but that it had more time in which to travel. On the other hand, B, who
will have been observing A in the same way, will conclude that it was As light that went
zig-zag instead of straight up and down, and therefore it was As clocks that were slower,
Neither man will be aware of the slowing of his own clocks relative to the other.

Motion and time are relative rather than absolute concepts. When dealing with everyday
terrestrial velocity, tA and tB are practically the same and therefore do not produce unusual
results. But when velocities approach that of light, the relativistic formulas must be employed.

The relativistic formula for measuring time was derived in the above experiment. And since
length cam be measured in terms of time (the time is takes light to transverse a certain legth), and
time is relative, length and space must also be relative.

Returning to our first problem of the astronomers on Galaxies A and B, we understand now why
we must apply a relativistic formula is

VAB = VA + VB

1 + VA VB/ c2

In which VA and VB are the velocities of the two galaxies as seen from the earth and VA B is the
velocity of one galaxy with respect to the other. Therefore
VAB = 1 c = 24/16 c = 24/25 c

1 + 9/16 25/16

Thus A will see B receding from him at 24/25 times the speed of light. And B will see A doing
the same thing!

All of these relativistic formulas from a part of Eisnteins theory of special relativity (uniform
motion only). When question of the extent and shape of space are considered, Eisteins theory of
general relativity is involved.

At the time that Eistein wa formulating his theories of relativity, he could not have known about
the expanding universe. Question about how far space extends and whether the universe has an
end, were being asked then, as they still are today.

A central theme of general relativity is the geometry (or shape) of space. Is the universe flast or
curved? What test could be used to obtain an answer? A pilot flying from Chicago to Paris feels
that he is moving in straight line although from his training he is well aware that is actually
describing a curve, following the curved surface of the earth(see Fif. 5.3) (This route is a
geodesic, the shortest distance between two points in any given geometry. In Euclidean or
plane geometry, a geodesic is a straight line.)

According to the theory of relativity, the path of light through space is determined by the
geometry of space just as the path of the airplane is determined by the geometry of the earth. The
theory further states that the shape or geometry os space is determined by distribution of matter
in the universe and that the path of light will be bent by the presence of such matter. The
amount of such curvature depends upon the average density of matter in the universe.

The fact that light curve in the presence of matter has been supported by observation taken
during total eclipses of the sun when the brilliant solar rays are blocked by the moon for a few
minutes. Starlight, normally invisible during daylight hours, can then be observed. At such times
very precise measurements have shown that light from stars passing very near the surface of the
sun is slightly deflected. The presence of matter in this case, the sun, has caused the path of light
to be bent (se Fig. 5.4) Since the path of light is determined by the geometry (or shape) of space,
this implies that space itself is curved by the presence of this matter.

To better visualize this concept of curved space, consider first the earth as a curved figure. It has
a finite (not infinite) area and yet is unbounded, i.e., it has no center or end to its surface area. It
is known also that fo large triangle on the surface of the earth, the angles do not add up to 180o as
they Euclidean (or plane) geometry. In a smilar way, this curved space we refer to has no center
or end but may have a finite volume.
We could prove that the earth is round by measuring the sum of the angles in a large triangle on
the earths surface, Similarly, if there were some way in which we could station three astronauts
on three remote galaxies, we could have them calculate the sum of the angles of the triangke that
they would from. A flat uncurved Euclidean universe would result 180o. If the sum were more
than 180o , it would be saddle-shaped or hyperbolic (See Fig. 5.5) A spherical universe would
mean that a space traveler, if he traveled long and far enough, would eventually come around to
his original starting point, much like the round- the- world tourist does. This would not be true
with the flat or the hyperbolic universe.

This experiment obviously cannot be performed. If however, we count the number of galaxies in
ever-in- creasing spherical shells around the earth, the results will differ, depending upon the
geometry of space. If space is flat and if galaxies are distributed evenly throughout this space,
when we double the radius of our original sphere, we should get eight time sthe number of
galaxies, since volume is proportional to the cube of the radius in Euclidean geometry (V= 4/3
r3 ). If the space is spherically curved, the number should be somewhat less than eight times.
And if space is hyperbolic or saddle-shaped, the number should be slightly greater than eight.
However, the limitations of our instruments in ecompassing such very large volumes of space
make the results as yet indeterminate.

Thus, when the vastness and complexity of the universe are contemplated, it is necessary to use
the concepts of relativity. As another example, if time proceses slow up as velocity approaches
that of light, space travellers will be able to reach far distant stars in what will seem them very
short periods of time. Back on earth, 1000 years may go by, but the astronaut, traveling close to
the speed of light will age only 20 to 30 years. This may sound fantastic but it has actually been
proved to be happening in the case of the (mu) meson. These are subatomic particles that are
naturally produced when cosmic rays strike molecules in the earths upper atmosphere. When
artificially produced by high high-energy atom-smashers, these mesons are found to be ex-
tremely short-lived. So short, in fact, that by our clocks the naturally-produced mesons should
not live long enough to travel through the atmosphere and reach ground. But they do, because
their velocity is so close to that of light that their clockshave been slowed down relative to urs-
and by our time-keeping they actually live longer!

In the study of the architecture and dynamics of the universe, these concepts, so foreign to our
every day thingking, become an integral part of theories of cosmology.